Ultimate wasn't even mac compatible lol.

I would play online poker in NJ if there was a cybercafe and walk into and hook up their internet and start playing somewhere along the NJ border which is only 15mins away.

Aww don't you miss the days of being able to log onto a poker site and be able to play a variety of games anytime of the day against people from all across the globe at various stakes. I sure as hell miss being able to play against some players who aren't as competitive or aren't as concerned with winning as I am.

Online Poker isn't flourishing because people have lost interest in playing poker along with some people no longer trusting it after incidences with sites like UB,AP, and Fulltilt Poker. The main reason though is that there is too much regulation. If you want the market to thrive you have to let it be free, not restrict it. Rules that are put in place should be simplified and not complicated. They should be created to only protect the consumers(The Players) and not be put in place to allow certain companies or individuals to have an unfair edge over their competition. We as poker players and as individuals shall decide what poker sites thrive and which ones perish. Protectionist policies do not belong in a free market and only hinder progress.

There was so much more to look forward to when playing poker in the Wild Wild InterWebs(The time before 2006 UIEGA). The player fields were much bigger which equated to much bigger prize pools in tournaments. It also meant having the chance to play against new players everyday which is refreshing compared to knowing at least one player at each of your tables nowadays. Those sites back in the day also had their falls like almost everything does, but you can't honestly tell me that were better of today playing online than we were 10 years ago.

People won't have the same incentive to play nowadays as they did in the past. Rake will naturally increase and rakeback will decrease if sites can't continue to make the profits that they desire. Even more reason to not play is the fact that the player pools are much smaller which leads to less opportunity and choices for players. Sites can only do so much to lure players to play, most of the decay were seeing today lies solely on the governments of the world.

They are the ones that destroyed the Golden Age of poker not the sites themselves. Of course there were some terrible management decisions from FTP that effected a huge chunk of poker players which than in turn made those players lose trust in not only FTP, but online poker as a whole. This all could of been fixed quickly however, if the government would of just immediately shut down FTP and reimbursed the players after it was made aware that player funds were misused. It's the government's job to stop corruption and prevent fraud, not avoid it or help spread it.

It's unfortunate that a site like Pokerstars was punished after all this nonsense. They did nothing wrong expect that they were too good at what they were doing. The reason we can't play on a site like Stars is because a few pathetic individuals are too scared of competition and they would rather lose some money and bribe congressman than compete against another company. Make sure at the very least to flip this man off in the picture below if you happen to run into him. It's people like him that hold progress and individuals back in this country.

Your post is indeed interesting and strikes chords of truth, but I also find it hypocritical. I wish only to point out what I find hypocritical to allow a response.

1. You spend much of your post expanding on the ills of regulation by government.

2. You state: "This all could of been fixed quickly however, if the government would of just immediately shut down FTP and reimbursed the players after it was made aware that player funds were misused. It's the government's job to stop corruption and prevent fraud, not avoid it or help spread it."


I do not intend to get into a discussion about this with you one way or the other. However, I feel you have to pick one. You can't keep complaining about government regulation and then say that problems should have been fixed by the government.

There is nothing wrong about complaining about regulation and than saying government has to step in under certain situations. If the government doesn't do anything about it than who will or who should? It's not the governments job to pick winners or losers or who thrives or who barley gets by. Their job is simply to be an official or referee not a player or a coach.

I don't understand what you mean.

You don't think there is anything wrong with someone saying that government regulation is awful and going on in that vain for a while and then the same person saying that Problem X could have been quickly solved if the government solved it?

I don't know how I can make it any simpler. The government's job is to enforce the rules for everyone. Not to enforce the rules for some and they should not make new rules to benefit a select few. Unfortunately, a lot of regulations that are created are created for the sole purpose of giving an individual or company an edge over their competition.

No I don't see the issue with criticizing certain regulation and than saying it is the government's duty to come to the aid of consumers. I'm not saying that all government regulation is bad. Regulation that protects consumers I'm perfectly find with assuming it doesn't restrict consumers themselves. The regulation I'm talking about that should be outlawed is what I stated in the paragraph above. It's just a form of crony capitalism.

Only state that can function by itself is California. It's almost 5x the size of NJ. But even here, there will be problems succeeding due to incompetence and greed of the Indian tribes. Until most of the states permit interstate online poker, it will be a joke.

My estimation for interstate online poker in the US? 2035 if we're lucky and I'm being somewhat optimistic.

LookBehindYou's view is that the government should step in and regulate when it benefits him, and stay out of things when regulation doesn't benefit him. Totally reasonable POV.

If you want to play 1/2 NLHE 6max cash then NJ poker is fine. Not everyone plays that.

No, you disconnect, your hand gets folded, and you lose whatever equity you had in the pot. Your hand is not considered all in.

welcome to how most of the country's poker players live

Not sure exactly what you are saying but just having multiple tables of one type of game running is not success

I'm just saying that if you go to a random poker room in Pennsylvania, or Illinois, or Oklahoma, or wherever... You're basically just going to walk into a room of 1/2 NL tables.

Sure, there also might be a 2/4 or 3/6 LHE game. Probably a 2/5 and possibly higher depending on the room. Some rooms might have a once-weekly 6/12 HORSE game or something. And if you're lucky enough to live near a live poker epicenter, it's very possible that (Depending on the day of the week), you'll be able to play your alternate game of choice.

I understand that by bringing together a larger group of players, online is supposed to alleviate this issue a little bit. But it's tougher when you're still working within the constraints of just one state. I'm as hopeful as anyone else that interstate compacts will allow for good stuff like more game options. But until that time, I'm in support of tempering expectations and looking at what the sites are doing successfully, rather than dwelling on what they don't have.

To be honest, I'm not particularly optimistic that all sorts of games are going to run even with some interstate compacts. Pokerstars isn't exactly overflowing with draw game and 8 game action, and they're drawing from an even bigger player pool. But that illustrates even more why it's stupid to be frustrated that the majority of games in NJ are low/mid NLHE.

Hey I'm just saying you guys in NJ have poker and a healthy player pool compared to the non US site I play on as well as the 1 Delaware site that I'm allowed to play on. Personally I'd love to just play HORSE or PLO when I play poker but its mostly just NLHE that runs these days but it seems like NJ has access to a better player pool then I do in DE.


You guys have it far better then me.... Be grateful.

No I don't. I just didn't understand your post. Thanks for clearing it up.

Did you even read what I wrote? That's is clearly not at all what I said. I didn't even have FTP funds when that fiasco happened so your actually incorrect. Government should only get involved when something has been violated.

Yeah, you are right. Expectations should be reasonable. But of course they are floundering in other ways such as the software, support, and promotions.

I enjoy mixed games. I could be bored and so fired up to play poker. But personally I have no interest in playing NL Cash with no antes.

When I evaluate things in my mind I'm comparing to what we had before. I gain zero consolation in the fact that it is better than Delaware.

And when I say what we had before I'm not just talking about Stars. I'm talking about Carbon Poker. I cannot play on Carbon anymore in NJ. It wasn't much but at least I could play a 215 Horse tourney every now and then in the their tourney series. Even their $60 Stud tourneys were great action.

NJ Poker has created a situation that is worse than after Black Friday. Yeah it's legal but I was never a "run scared" kind of guy.

I definitely understand that. Miss how poker was.

Absolutely a good article.

However, I am not an advocate of interstate, state, or the federal regulation of Poker.

I miss the old days on Pokerstars, get a check-add it to income-pay the tax. I say let the IRS do their jobs and make examples of the worst offenders (those who don’t claim their winnings). Let me do with my money (take risks) what I want.

What makes us think that the government being interested in online poker is good thing? And that regulation is the answer? All I read from advocates and lawmakers is about the tax revenue it will generate; and I’m concerned as to how the government is going to decide to allocate/level this tax towards poker players-not to mention work with the poker sites to make this a reality.

If the regulation is fair then I’d be all for it, but because of how things (black Friday etc.) have been handled to this point-there is nothing to compel me to believe that any type of regulation is going to be healthy for online poker.

Regulation... I poop on you...

That's why I call it rig-ulation. And it's not a good thing.

Though to be fair, I thought the rakes on NJ sites would be higher due to rig-ulation. But that wasn't the case.

I would like to play on global Pokerstars as much as anyone. But let's not act like unregulated online poker was just a bunch of classy organizations, like Pokerstars.

The majority of online poker sites were run by shady dudes in places like Antigua. Players frequently got cheated and straight-up robbed by those sites. The consumer protections offered by regulation are a very positive step forward for the industry.

I feel fine playing on the unregulated sites now especially Bovada than on regulated sites. Yes there may be shady dudes operating some of these sites, but couldn't we expand on this and say this is the case in a lot of aspects of life? There have been more scandals in things outside of poker than inside. I will take the small risk that my money may be vulnerable if the DoJ ever decides to strike again.

I hope I'm wrong, but I see regulation killing this game. Geolocation is still a problem and so are many things. The small positive of security is out weighed by many negatives. I think regulation will hurt the interest for casuals in big tournaments as well because they will get hit with the tax hammer as soon as they win, but still be losers by the end of the year.

The only positive for regulation is that the average public will now know poker is "legal". The government just wants their dime and we all know that won't be going to anything useful probably just unnecessary pay raises. I'm sure the national debt is still going to sky rocket up even with additional income streams coming in. Talking about shady how much shady stuff goes on that we have zero knowledge about?

"Rig-ulation."

I'm going to use that...

Agree about the taxes, but when these things are decided state to state it still has the potential to be a mess...

Federal Gov. needs to see a supreme court case (and all the evidence) and declare poker a game of skill.

Maybe while I'm at it I'll introduce them to my flying pig.